4 ms·
Thanks for the context. So that solution does not cover all possible cases. Lovely of Google to ask that question. Edit: not only that, the running time of Go
by alecco 14y ago
Thanks for the context.
So that solution does not cover all possible cases. Lovely of Google to ask that question.
Edit: not only that, the running time of Google's "solution" would be terrible, aren't there other possible data sets not covered or am I missing something?
- ChuckMcM 14y agoActually it can. I'll leave it up to you to figure it out. Proving that the adjusted algorithm works in all cases gets into some interesting number theory (think Galois Fields).
- alecco 14y agoI rather spend my time with a useful solution than this path. Also it's a BS question anyway.
- ChuckMcM 14y agoWell in the case of Google's interviewing techniques they don't really care about the question per se, what they look for is how folks reason about things. You can start down one path, back up, head down another, and explore a variety of paths to possible solutions. The only bad answer is "That's a silly question, why would I ever need to do that?" or something similar. An unwillingness to engage in a discussion, even about 'impossible' problems, was the most common reason I saw on feedback where Google passed on the candidate.
- alecco 14y ago> Well in the case of Google's interviewing techniques they don't really care about the question per se From my experience interviewing for Google, I beg to differ. Many other accounts seem to confirm this.